Thomas County cat. [volume] (Colby, Kan.) 1885-1891, 1887-02-10
BARRED WIRE FENCES.
The Rights and Liabilities of Persons
Who Maintain Them.

The Rights and Liabilities of Persons
Who Maintain Them.
The barbed wire fence is of compara-
lively recent origin. 1t is useful but
somewhat dangerous, and the rights
and liabilities of those who maintain
such fences are perhaps not yet fully
ascertained as to all their details.
These two principles, however. will be
found guide to any ordinary case: 1.
He who maintains any thing that is a
source of danger to others is liable for
any injury resulting therefrom. But
(2) one who is aware of the danger and
is liable to receive injury must take
reasonable precautions 20 protect HIM
self, and if he fails in taking such pre-
cautions and is injured for want of
them he must bear his own loss.
Hence, if A stretches barbed wire
fence along the highway and B is about
to drive stock along the highway pas
the fence, he must while passing use
all reasonable precaution to pre-
vent his stock from coming
in contact with the fence to their
injury. If he does SO and his
stock is injured Notwithstanding A is
liable; or if the injury is of such a nat
ure that it would have happened in
spite of any such precaution A is still
liable. for he can not be relieved by BIS
failure to do Il thing which would have
ayailed nothing. But if 3 acts in
negligent and careless manner and
and there occurs an injury which he
could have prevented by proper con-
duct the loss is his own; it is his duty
to prevent any loss if he can, and, fall
ing to do so, he can not recover from
another no more to blame than himself.
The division line of FERNS is in legal
contemplation a mathematical line
length without breadth or thickness.
Hence Il fence on the line is an impOssi-
bility. 1t must be half on one farm
and half on the other. Where by
agreement of adjoing owners such
fence is maintained each runs his own
risk and can look no further than to
himself for recompense in case of loss,
for when he agreed to the fence he
agreed to all its dangers.
If A and b are adjoining owners and
ApropOses to erect a barbed wire line
fence between them and b objects, A
must set the fence wholly within his
own land. for he has no right to set any
part of it upon BIS land without BIS
consent. If he place the fence upon
his own land. but so near the line-say
one inch within it-that B s stock is still
in danger while upon his own land. A
is still liable until B knows of the stu
alton. But after b is aware of the
danger he must protect his stock by a
barrier of some kind upon his own
land, for he can not continue to expose
his stock to danger and then hold an
other for the loss that may occur. But
if A place the fence so far within
the line of his land-say some yards
that BIS stock can not come in contact
with it except by trespass upon
AS land, A is free from liability, for it
is BIS business to cOnfine his stock upon
his own land and not allow them TO
trespass upon adjoining territory. But
just how near the line of AS land his
fence may be and still exempt him from
liability no one can tell. Under some
circumstances and perhaps with some
kind of stock wider margin would
be allowed than with others. The
foregoing rules apply to accidents and
casualties only. An injury to stock
maliciously planned and executed lies
at the door of the perpetrator. You
will see that it is impossible to give a
categorical answer rs to liability for
injuries caused by barbed wire fenc-
ing. The closest scrutiny into the cir
cumstances of the individual case will
often be required in order to locate
the blame. The rules of law upon this
subject are founded in the strictest JUS
tice and common-sense, but so COM
plex may the circumstances be that
their application will become a matter
of the greatest difficulty.-Jdmes N.
Mckay, in N. Y. Tribune.